A bid to build a construction waste disposal plant the size of more than four football pitches near Crowland has been recommended for refusal.
Agricultural and Environmental Business Consultants has applied to build and carry out the processing and storage of construction, demolition and excavation wastes to produce soils and aggregate products at Barrier Bank adjacent to Decoy Farm.
The 4.5 hectare site would be built on a greenfield site and process up to 75,000 tonnes of waste per year with a maximum of 40,000 tonnes being stored on site at any one time.
Lincolnshire County Council’s Planning and Regulation Committee has been recommended to refuse the application by planning officers when it meets on Monday, January 14 due to the detrimental effect the development would have on the local countryside.
Pinchbeck based Agricultural and Environmental Business Consultants say the development would create an additional two full-time and up to two part-time members of staff in its first year. The company currently has 45 full-time members.
The report into the application by Andy Gutherson, interim executive director for place at Lincolnshire County Council, says the company’s justification for the development is: “There is a lack of suitable facilities in the Spalding area to manage soils resulting from development activity.
“This results in illegal activity and in extreme cases fly tipping which is a significant environmental and financial cost to the taxpayer.”
It also states the company looked into two other sites in Spalding for the proposal in Wardentree Lane/Enterprise Park and Clay Lake Industrial Estates.
Objections to developing the site 2km north of Crowland included two local residents and the owner of the adjacent Decoy Farm while Crowland Parish Council had not responded to the consultation.
The officer’s report says: “South Holland District Council objects to the application and states that the proposal will create a discordant feature in the open countryside and will have a detrimental impact on the character of the surrounding area as well as highway safety.
“There are also concerns regarding the storage of loose materials in close proximity to the A16 and the loss of agricultural land.
“There are other facilities within the district that already provide this function and a substantive argument as to why the development is essential in this location has not been provided.”
Recommending refusal the report states: “The proposal site comprises of agricultural land and is a greenfield site lying within the open countryside.”
It continues: “The applicant has failed to unequivocally demonstrate why a facility of this size and scale has to be located within the open countryside.”
